Author: Peter Kappler
Date: 00:55:21 04/05/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 05, 2000 at 01:15:33, KarinsDad wrote: >On April 04, 2000 at 22:35:51, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >>On April 04, 2000 at 21:17:53, KarinsDad wrote: >> >>>On April 04, 2000 at 21:01:41, Bruce Moreland wrote: >>> >>>>On April 04, 2000 at 18:57:59, KarinsDad wrote: >>>> >>>>>PS. However, if a computer announces mate in 573, it should have to prove it and >>>>>should have to play unless it's opponent resigns. The TB code or the TBs could >>>>>have a bug, so it's only mate if it is mate. IMO. >>>> >>>>Why should it get the opportunity to prove it, if it takes 14 hours to do it, >>>>requires an exception to FIDE rules to do it, and requires that I modify *my* >>>>program so that it will allow the game to continue after it is over according to >>>>FIDE rules? >>>> >>>>bruce >>> >>>Why should it take 14 hours? In a G60 game, it would have less than an hour (of >>>it's time) to prove it. Just because it has a forced mate does not mean that it >>>gets to go over the time limit. >> >>G/60 is not the shortest time control played. > > >So what is your point? How many 14 hour games are you aware of outside of >correspondence chess? > >The 50 move rule is a bogus rule anyway. The reason it is bogus is that the >Fischer time controls are bogus. You lost me there. Fischer time controls have nothing to do with the advent of the 50-move rule. The 50-move rule was around long before Fischer time controls became popular. --Peter
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.